The Elon Musk “Election Buying” Problem, Marine Le Pen Guilty & Banned, Chappell Roan Backlash
PDS Published 03/31/2025
-
Trump just said he is “not joking” about seeking a third term in office.
Right, Trump has repeatedly teased the possibility of another term in office, despite the fact that the 22nd Amendment of the Constitution clearly states:
“No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice”
And while at least one of his most fervent allies in the House has proposed a long-shot amendment that would allow Trump to seek a third term, Republicans have largely painted the president’s comments as a joke or trolling.
But in a phone interview with NBC yesterday, Trump made it clear that he is actually serious about this, telling the outlet:
“A lot of people want me to do it. But, I mean, I basically tell them we have a long way to go, you know, it’s very early in the administration.”
“I’m focused on the current.”
And when asked if he wanted another term, Trump responded: “I like working.”
With the outlet asking him to clarify, and Trump explicitly saying:
“I’m not joking. But I’m not — it is far too early to think about it.”
But when NBC pressed the president on whether he had been presented with plans to seek a third term, Trump just vaguely said:
“There are methods which you could do it.”
And there, you had host Kristen Welker asking about a scenario where JD Vance could run for office with Trump as his vice president and then pass the role off to Trump.
To which Trump replied:
“that’s one” method, adding “there are others, too.”
However, when he was asked to share another method, Trump just said “no.”
Right, and to that point, it’s unclear what other “methods” could really be used besides just amending the Constitution to abolish the two-term limit.
But that would be incredibly challenging — either two-thirds of Congress would have to vote in favor, or two-thirds of the states would have to call a constitutional convention to propose changes.
And regardless, both options would still require ratification from three-quarters of the states.
And as far as this idea that Trump could assume the presidency if JD Vance ran, tapped Trump as his veep, then stepped aside — experts say there are flaws there too.
Right, there has been some debate over a provision of the 22nd Amendment that focuses on presidents being “elected” but doesn’t address whether they can ascend to the office as vice president under a president who stepped down from power.
But experts say such a scheme would run up against other provisions of the Constitution.
Like Derek Muller, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame and a scholar in election law, who explained that the 12th Amendment, wh ich was ratified in 1804, explicitly says:
“no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”
Arguing that the language there implies that if Trump can’t run for president again under the 22nd Amendment, he ALSO wouldn’t be eligible to run for vice president either, adding:
“I don’t think there’s any ‘one weird trick’ to getting around presidential term limits.”
With Muller going on to note that, beyond that, even if Trump were going to try to attempt such a move, “there are tremendous complexities in its implementation” that are both legal and logistical, adding:
“My belief–and perhaps I’ll be proven wrong–is that such bluster is bluster to give the illusion of strength of a lame-duck president.”
Right, and that is an opinion that has been echoed by many others — this is just a tactic to strong-arm or, at the very least, distract from all the other things the administration and Elon Musk are doing.
But, at the same time, you also have others saying that we should not be taking this lightly, writing things on social media like:
“People dismissing the idea of Trump winning a third term because of constitutional term limits are underestimating the far Right’s willingness to circumvent the law - by any means necessary.”[]
Now, as far as how the right has responded, it’s actually been a very interesting mix.
Right, on one hand, you have some downplaying the comments or echoing left-leaning outlets in refuting the viability of such a move.
But, on the other hand, you also had others implying that it is a real possibility that Trump could legally run as the vice president of Vance or someone else and then ascend to the presidency when they step down.
With multiple right-leaning outlets painting this as a “loophole” without any mention of the 12th amendment or other legal obstacles.
This including The New York Post, which also tried to preemptively downplay the fact that Trump — who will already be the oldest-ever president when he completes his second term — would be nearing 87 at the end of a hypothetical third term, writing:
“A small handful of leaders have led major Western democracies well into old age.”
Which 1) it’s crazy that’s even a conversation that's being had and 2) I don’t think we could technically call America a democracy anymore if this were to play out…
But yeah, on that happy note, I’d love to know any and all thoughts you have here.
Do you think this is something we should be taking seriously or just more bluster to make Trump seem stronger and distract from the many controversial actions of his administration?
-
And then, we have entered a new wave of Chappell Roan backlash.
This because she was just on Call Her Daddy, and her comments about an artist’s role in discussing politics has pissed a lot of people off.
So, it started with her noting that people have different expectations for her as a gay pop star.
Saying on red carpets, she gets questions about issues related to the LGBTQ+ community, but arguing that just because she is opinionated on and impacted by this topic does not mean she knows every single thing about every single issue.
And she then went on to say she does not know how any artist could manage having a full career and fully formed views on so many subjects:
“How can these girls tour, write, perform, interview, sleep, eat – and eat – and fucking work out and, like, how can they do it all and lead a team and be a boss and pay people and be like fucking so politically educated. It's exhausting and it's also impossible also why the fuck are you looking to me for some political answer. You think I have the fucking answer…Like I'm a pop star. I wish I had the answers. I wish the president was a pop star but she's not.” (44:35-45:27)
And these comments irked people, some saying it was out of touch for her to suggest there’s not enough time to educate yourself because you don’t have to be a pop star to have a busy job, and tons of working people educate themselves. []
Others mad because they think Chappell is using drag and making political art but still wants to be excused from political conversation. [][]
But for a ton of people, the backlash stemmed from the fact that her comments don’t exist in a vacuum, right, it is not the first time she has given her thoughts on a celebrity’s role in politics.
Last fall, she faced backlash after telling The Guardian that she did not feel pressure to endorse a presidential candidate because she sees “so many issues with our government in every way” and “there’s problems on both sides.”[]
And some thought that it was irresponsible for her to put both parties on the same level when one is clearly worse for LGBTQ+ rights.
She she ended up making two videos following up as criticism of her was just getting louder and louder:
"I have encouraged people to use critical thinking skills to learn about what they're voting for.” (0:00-0:05)
Actions speak louder than words. And actions speak louder than endorsement.” (1:17-1:25)
“No, I am not voting for Trump. And yes I will always question those in power.” (2:06-2:13)
“Fuck Trump for fuckin real but fuck some of the shit that has gone down in the Democratic party that has failed people like me and you.” (1:00-1:08)
“Yeah, I’m voting for fucking Kamala, but I’m not settling for what has been offered because that’s questionable.” (1:34-1:41)
And this was just a whole ordeal, the backlash blew up for a number of reasons, and started a wave of op-eds on celebrities and politics.
And so people thought that after this whole situation, it just did not make sense for Chappell to go on Call Her Daddy and suggest that, as a singer, she should not be turned to for political discussions.
Right, arguing that she was the one who positioned herself as an activist in the first place.[][]
With some writing:
Right, arguing she “dipped her to into politics” by having so much “smoke for Biden and Kamala” but now is saying “she’s just a pop girly who’s too busy to keep up.”[]
But of course, people were also defending her, saying Chappell has made it clear what her beliefs are through her work and by platforming other queer artists, so she is walking the walk and that is enough.[][]
Others just adding:
“chappell isn’t saying she isn’t politically educated…she’s just saying she doesn’t have all the answers so people shouldn’t be looking to her for them which is true.”[]
“I feel like some of you should be more worried about America literally turning into a fascist state than a Chappell Roan interview but idk.”[]
But this is not the only backlash she is even facing from her Call Her Daddy appearance.
Right, there is a whole other side controversy happening because she said all her friends who are parents at her age are miserable and in hell.
So that’s just another thing, which is why some are arguing the girl just needs a new PR approach.[]
And I would love to know your thoughts on any of this here.
-
A race for a single state supreme court seat in Wisconsin could determine the fate of Western civilization.
At least according to Elon Musk, who’s liable to exaggerate, though in this case he may be kind of right.
So the election happens tomorrow, and on one side you have the liberal, Susan Crawford, a Dane County judge. [Image]
And on the other side the conservative, Brad Schimel [Pronounce 01:33], a judge and former Republican state attorney general. [Same image]
Now if Crawford wins, the court will keep its liberal majority, and if Schimel wins, it’ll flip conservative. [Image]
So this race is seen as pivotal, not only for local politics, but also for the country as a whole.
Because first, for the local stuff, the court is set to decide two cases that could determine whether abortion is banned statewide. [Quote, find “abortion”]
With Republicans also worried it could reverse a voter ID law and restrictions on collective bargaining for most public workers in the state.
But then for the national stuff, Wisconsin is a swing state, and the court could redraw the Congressional maps.
So while six of the state’s eight federal representatives are Republican, a liberal court might change that.
And the GOP’s majority in the House right now is razor thin; right, it’s just three seats.
So conceivably, the outcome of this Wisconsin Supreme Court race could flip the balance in Congress, giving the Democrats more power to block Trump’s agenda.
And with stakes that high, it’s no wonder the GOP’s mobilized like crazy.
With Trump endorsing Schimel, Don Jr. holding a rally for him, and Elon Musk having the judge on X for an audio livestream interview. [Post]
As well as holding his own rally in Wisconsin Sunday where he impressed upon his supporters the need to get out the vote. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 13:29 - 13:38] Caption: “I feel like this is one of those things that may not seem that it’s gonna affect the entire destiny of humanity but I think it will.”
So just like how he poured nearly 300 million dollars into the presidential race, Musk has devoted a fair bit of money to this one as well.
With him and groups affiliated with him spending 20 million dollars in Wisconsin, over a fifth of the more than 90 million spent by both sides overall. [Quote, find “90 million”]
Making this the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history.
Though while he’s clearly the biggest, Musk and Republicans point out that the Democrats enjoy support from a few big name donors as well.
Namely George Soros, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman. [Quote same link, find “Soros”]
Now traditionally, the Democrats would be expected to have a strong advantage in a race like this, but with all the money going around and such a high voter turnout, who knows.
Right, I mean as of this recording, some 650,000 people have voted early, with turnout up as much as 40% in some counties.
So Republicans think they can shake up old patterns by whipping up extraordinary enthusiasm for an election that usually doesn’t draw much attention.
[Clip, 16:53 - 16:56] Caption: “We need to generate an anomaly in the matrix.”
And toward that goal, Musk has offered registered voters in Wisconsin 100 dollars if they provided contact information and signed a petition opposing “activist judges.” [Quote, find “100”]
Also offering the 100 dollars for each registered Wisconsin voter they referred to sign the petition, though the fine print said Elon’s PAC would determine whom to pay and noted payments may not be made for months. [Same quote]
Then, on Sunday, Musk announced a plan to give 20 dollars to residents who took pictures over the next two days holding photos of Schimel. [Lead B roll into clip]
And then he pulled this stunt with two people who signed his petition. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 08:27 - 08:33, 08:42 - 08:46; Clip, 10:07 - 10:11, 10:28 - 10:32] Caption: “Let me first hand out two $1 million checks in appreciation. … So the first check goes to Nicholas Jacobs. … Second one is to Katarina [last name]. … And you know, like I said, this is just helpful for getting attention, and it’s kind of fun to see the legacy media lose their minds over it too.”
Now Elon making it rain with all his money has sparked a lot of outrage, with some accusing him of essentially bribery.
And in fact, after legal experts raised concerns, he deleted a post justifying Sunday’s event and prize money as an “appreciation for early voters.” [Quote]
And although the state attorney general tried to block the two million dollar giveaway, the state supreme court allowed it to go through.
So we’ll see what happens tomorrow, but if y’all are in Wisconsin, get out to those polling booths.
-
We have two closely-watched special elections happening in Florida to fill a pair of Congressional seats.
Right, one of the elections will determine the next representative of Florida’s 6th district —
A position that was left open after Mike Waltz left Congress to be Trump’s national security adviser and leak private Signal messages to Atlantic reporters.
And the other race is for a seat in Florida’s 1st district, which was vacated by Matt Gaetz, who resigned immediately after Trump tapped him to be Attorney General —
But then later withdrew his nomination once it became clear he didn’t have votes to get confirmed in the Senate.
Now, initially, Republicans thought these were both going to be super easy breezy elections.
I mean, we’re talking about two solidly red districts that Trump won by more than 30 points back in November.
But now, the political winds have shifted in a way that is making the GOP sweat.
Right, first of all, Trump’s approval rating has been slipping amid his first chaotic weeks in office.
And while he still remains above water in Florida, some Republicans are worried that he has angered constituents in a state, which in turn could hurt the two Republican candidates in these races — both of whom he endorsed.
And second, Democrats in both races have been bolstered by a massive swell of grassroots energy from across the country, pushing both to dramatically out-raise their opponents and overperform early voting expectations.
Right, in the 1st District, gun control activist Gay Valimont has reportedly raised over $6.5 million — three times more than $2.1 million brought in by her Republican opponent, Florida’s chief financial officer Jimmy Patronis.
But over in the 6th District, public school teacher Josh Weil has outraised Republican State Sen. Randy Fine by nearly 10-to-1.
With Weil racking up $9.5 million while Fine had less than $1 million — nearly half of which he donated to his OWN campaign.
And, as a result, polls show that this special election in the solidly red 6th district has actually become a competitive race.
Now, with all that, Fine still is polling ahead, and Republicans have widely said they are confident they will still win both these contests.
And while many Democrats have acknowledged that likely fate too, it would still be a massively important symbolic victory for them if they can make the margins tighter.
Right, for Democrats, these two elections are key tests of how voters are feeling just over two months into the Trump administration, and a good showing in deep-red areas could give them so much-needed momentum.
Now, that said, experts do emphasize that we can’t draw too much information about how either party will fair in the midterms just by looking at these special elections because they are so low-turnout and have favored Dems in recent years.
But a close margin for either of these races would have more than just a symbolic impact — as The New York Times explains:
“But an especially narrow margin on Tuesday could affect governing in the House and Mr. Trump’s agenda if it spooks Republicans who have so far proved unusually aligned with the president and one another.”
What’s more, the GOP concerns over these two Florida seats has already had another tangible impact: the withdrawal of Rep. Elise Stefanik’s nomination as U.N. ambassador.
Right, Trump nominated her months ago, but the party kept stalling her confirmation because she was needed for key votes in the House, where the GOP has a razor-thin majority.
But last week, Trump announced that he was pulling her nomination and actively admitted that the decision was driven in part by fears that Republicans would not be able to prevent her seat from flipping blue.
As well as concerns about the two races in Florida — particularly the 6th District:
REPORTER: “Mr. President, yesterday you asked Representative Stefanik to stay in her seat. Can you explain your reason for that? Did it have anything to do with the tight polling in the Florida district that former Representative [Mike] Waltz held?”
TRUMP: “Well, I think we’re doing — yeah, I think we have — as you know, we have a few elections going on. And she is phenomenal, number one.” (0:03-0:22)
“We cannot take a chance. We have a slim margin. We don’t want to take any chances. We don’t want to experiment.” (0:51-0:57)
“When it comes to Florida, you have two races, and they seem to be good. It’s a Trump plus 32 area. The one thing is they’re spending like $12 million, and our candidate doesn’t have that kind of money, spending much less than that, like maybe one twelfth, about a million dollars, a little bit more than a million dollars. So the airwaves are blanketed. And you never know what happens in a case like that.” (1:05-1:30)
Right, and experts say those comments are incredibly significant — especially when it comes to Stefanik’s seat.
Because while it is definitely more moderate than these Florida seats, it’s been widely considered pretty safe — I mean, he wouldn’t have picked her in the first place if he didn’t think the seat could stay red.
With one Democratic strategist explaining:
“Trump clearly understands the perilous position of the GOP house majority and the fact the GOP might lose this very red district in Florida. Trump's actions to pull the nomination are a clear indicator of how worried he is about losing ruby red seats.”
But yeah, for now, we’ll have to wait and see how these elections play out.
And in the meantime, PLEASE go vote if you live in one of these districts or Wisconsin.
Unbox comfort at Rovelab and get $200 off—only for the next 7 days. Sit back, relax, and enjoy the M1 sofa.
-
French politics -- and really European politics in general -- just got a major shakeup after Marine Le Pen was found guilty of embezzlement today. [broll]
She’s the face of the National Rally, a major right wing force in French politics and often considered a top contender for President.
The case stems from 4 million euros that the European Parliament allocated to the National Rally between 2004 and 2016 so that they could hire assistants for their work in the EU parliament.[]
But Le Pen and 24 others allegedly misused those funds by paying party staffers who weren’t involved in work for the parliament.
Le Pen denied this, claiming the people hired with the EU’s money were political aides and not direct employees of the European Parliament -- so the National Rally was allowed to have them do party-related work. []
The court disagreed and slapped her with a 100 thousand euro fine and a four-year prison sentence.
Two of those will be suspended and the other two will be under house arrest.
But the most impactful thing the court is doing is banning her from running for office for five years.
Even when Le Pen appeals the ruling, it may not matter much.
Right, during her appeal -- which could take years -- the fine and prison sentence could be put on pause.
But her ban from office starts immediately and won’t be paused during the appeals process
(And she was obviously not happy about the ban as reportedly during the proceedings she was kinda just sitting there, but the second it was clear she would be banned she just stormed out).
As you can imagine, her party completely blasted the ruling, with Le Pen’s protege writing on X:
“Today it’s not only Marine Le Pen that has been unjustly condemned. It’s French democracy that’s being executed.”
Over in Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orban wrote: “Je Suis Marine!” (jeh swee…)
That’s a spin on the “je suis Charlie” campaign that went around after the magazine Charlie Hedbo was attacked by terrorists in 2015.
And supporters of right wing politics online had a lot to say, but the most common sentiment was that “democracy has died in Europe.”
They point to not only Le Pen, but other actions in countries like the US where Trump was impeached.
(In general there’s a real sentiment that any actions against a right-wing politician are politically motivated, regardless of the facts surrounding the case).
On the other side there were people supporting the court’s decision.
Some joked that this decision is the best Eid (eed like “feed) present to the country’s Muslim population (considering Le Pen’s anti-Muslim stances).
But based on the reactions across X, this is an issue that far-right supporters care about far more than those on the left.
Right, their posts are blowing up while the other side seems to go “eh, that’s the ruling.”
(Searching Bluesky also showed that center and left wing people didn’t seem to care a lot about this as the posts didn’t really gain traction).
Either way we’ll be seeing the fallout from this decision for a long time.
And unless Le Pen can win an appeal pretty quickly, it’s extremely unlikely that we’ll see her running for office in 2027.
So we might be seeing the new faces of the National Rally finally take over.
But what do you think?
-
Starting on May 7, nobody in the entire state of Utah will get fluoride from their public drinking water.
This because Republican Governor Spencer Cox just signed a law banning the mineral from public water systems. [Image]
Making Utah the first state in the nation to do that.
With proponents of the law making several arguments, such as that fluoride hurts children’s brains, that it deprives people of individual choice, and that it’s too expensive. [Image]
And then public health experts countering those claims, saying that fluoride strengthens oral health, especially for poor people who lack access to dental care. [Image]
Now it shouldn’t be too surprising that Utah took this step.
Considering that a few years ago it ranked 44th for the percentage of residents that receive fluoridated water, according to the CDC. [Quote, find “44th”]
And even before this ban, only 66 out of 484 water systems that reported data last year fluoridated their water, according to the Associated Press. [Quote same link, find “484”]
Though notably Salt Lake City was one of them. [Same quote]
But Utah’s also not that unique; right, other states including South Carolina, Florida and Ohio are currently considering their own bans.
With similar legislation having been proposed in Kentucky, Montana and Tennessee as well.
This as hundreds of local municipalities have banned fluoride, including Portland. [Image]
And in September, a federal judge ordered the EPA to further regulate fluoride, though he noted the risk was uncertain. [Headline]
With RFK Jr., who’s now the health secretary, then promising in November that the Trump administration would “advise all US water systems to remove fluoride from public water.” [Image and tweet]
[Clip, 01:18 - 01:21] Caption: “I think fluoride is a poison.”
So just like vaccine skepticism, fluoride fears have been brewing for decades but really exploded after the pandemic.
With them alleging it causes everything from acne, high blood pressure and thyroid dysfunction to bone cancer, kidney disease and arthritis.
As well as, and this is the most heated accusation, a decrease in intelligence.
Now I’ll just spoil the ending right now: the evidence for those claims is very weak.
But before we dive into exactly why, let’s get the facts right about fluoride.
Starting with the basics: it’s a naturally occuring mineral found in water, soil, plants, rocks and even the air.
And by the late 1930s, scientists discovered that people whose water naturally had more fluoride also had fewer cavities and stronger teeth. [Quote, find “1930s”]
Also, experts say just putting it in toothpaste or mouthwash is not enough because it needs to be ingested to get the most benefit.
So in 1945, Grand Rapids, Michigan became the first U.S. city to start adding fluoride to tap water.
And cavities among young children plummeted by 60% within a decade. [Quote, find “60”]
So federal officials endorsed water fluoridation in 1950, and the practice spread throughout the country from there. [Quote, find “1950”]
[Clip, 04:48 - 04:53, 04:56 - 04:00] Caption: “Now, our children can have better health through fluoridated water. … They can drink away tomorrow’s tooth decay.”
So by 2020, just over 70% of Americans received fluoride through their community water source, according to the CDC. [Quote, find “72.7”]
Making it what advocates call one of the greatest public health interventions of the 20th century.
With the CDC, the American Dental Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics all supporting water fluoridation. [Quote, find “major public”]
And a dentist telling NBC News: [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:47 - 00:57] Caption: “We know that fluoride works. All the journal articles have shown that there’s a 25% reduction in children and adult decay for people that are in community-fluoridated water.”
So then why all the skepticism? Where’s it coming from?
Well when you dig into it, the skeptics almost always cite this one study from 2019 in Canada that associated fluoride exposure during pregnancy with lower IQ scores in children. [Quote, find “Canadian”]
But that study was based on self-reporting, which is not very rigorous, and has been criticized for its perceived methodological shortcomings. [Same quote]
Now there is another report that came out last fall from the federal government’s National Toxicology Program.
With it finding that water containing more than 1.5 milligrams per liter of fluoride is consistently associated with lower IQs in children. [Quote, find “Mexico”]
But that report too has been widely criticized for the low quality of its data and its irrelevance to the United States.
Right, because its evidence came from Canada, China, India, Iran, Pakistan and Mexico, focusing on populations that received very high fluoride levels.
But the U.S. has never recommended more than 1.2 milligrams per liter, and even then only in cooler climates where people supposedly drink less water. [Quote, find “1962”]
And in 2015, officials lowered the recommendation to just 0.7 milligrams nationwide. [Same quote]
This after a condition called fluorosis, where you get streaks or splotches on your teeth, had become more common in kids. [Quote, find “splotches”]
A condition, by the way, which the deputy surgeon general at the time said was primarily cosmetic. [Quote, find “cosmetic”]
So there’s still no good evidence the standard fluoride levels here are dangerous.
Though that’s not to say nobody ingests too much fluoride.
Right, the report noted that about 0.6% of the U.S. population, or nearly two million people, are on water systems with naturally occurring fluoride levels of 1.5 milligrams or higher. [Quote, find “1.9”]
Which is the level the report claims with moderate confidence could be dangerous for kids, though the WHO maintains that it's safe.
But experts say the fix for that is to just reduce the fluoride levels, not ban it entirely.
Plus the CDC already recommends limiting how much fluoridated toothpaste you give to your kids.
Prescribing no more than the size of a pea on their toothbrush for ages three to six, no more than a grain of rice for those below three, and none at all before age two. [Quote, find “grain”]
And as for all the other, non-IQ related claims about fluoride’s supposed harms, the evidence behind those isn't much stronger.
Right, although earlier research was mixed, the most recent “population-based studies found no evidence linking fluoridated water to bone cancer,” for example. [Quote, find “bone cancer”]
And when it comes to pregnancy, arthritis and kidney disease, the research is mixed, with scientists saying we need to study it more before jumping to any conclusions. [Quote same link, find “kidney”]
But there is one possible harm that I have to admit, actually does have some really strong evidence backing it up.
[Clip, 00:52 - 00:56] Caption: “I don’t like them putting chemicals in the water that turn the friggin frogs gay!”
-
And for your daily dose of good news, let’s talk about rhinos.
Right, Uganda used to be home to hundreds of both the black and northern white species of rhinoceros.
But by the early 80s, native populations of rhinos in Uganda were wiped out thanks to poaching, trafficking, and political turmoil. []
Flash forward a decade later and a charity named Rhino Fund Uganda was formed and they approached the owner of the Ziwa (Zee-wah) cattle ranch, Captain Joseph Charles Roy, with a crazy idea. []
It turns out that Captain Roy’s cattle ranch was sitting on prime rhino habitat.
So the Rhino Fund Uganda charity asked him to move his cattle and bring in herds of rhinos instead.
Now, according to Captain Roy’s daughter, he was a lover of animals and an aspiring conservationist at the time so he was all the way on board. []
So in 2005 and 2006, 6 southern white rhinos were relocated to the ranch - with 2 flying all the way from Disney Animal Kingdom Florida on Roy’s own cargo airline.
And over the last 20 years, the population of rhinos on the Zee-wah ranch has steadily grown. [B Roll 1:20-1:45]
Today, they reportedly have 48 different rhinos - with 5 being born in the last 3 months alone.
And, just to put that in perspective, a pair of rhinos at Uganda’s Wildlife Conservation Education Center were introduced at the same time as the Zee-wah rhinos and they have had no babies at all. []
With Wendy, Captain Roy’s daughter who has since taken over some of Zee-wah’s management and collaboration with the Ugandan Wildlife Authority, saying,
“Sometimes in the evenings, when I see the rhinos coming towards HQ, I think, ‘Wow, this looks like the Garden of Eden.’ It’s incredible: not just rhinos but zebras, antelopes, waterbucks. It’s surreal, it’s peaceful and, of course, you have to respect your environment and be equally as peaceful as the animals.” []
But the Zee-wah ranch is quickly reaching its capacity - there’s space for roughly 70 to 80 rhinos and they’re expecting to add another 8 to their population from another African country in the coming months. [B Roll 1:50-2:05]
So as the rhino population outgrows the Zee-wah ranch, the question of “what now” is popping up.
Where are the rhinos going to go and are they going to be safe from all the things that led to their extinction in Uganda in the first place?
The plan for Zee-wah was always to breed enough rhinos that they can be translocated to other parts of Uganda - like national parks. []
But poaching is a serious problem at national parks because they are largely unfenced - not to mention human settlements creeping in which ups the risk of human-wildlife conflict. []
Now, the UWA has been preparing the Ajai Wildlife Reserve for the last 4 years for the reintroduction of rhinos.
But they’ve been hit with setback after setback including a lack of funding, a shortage of rangers, and issues relocating people who live in the area. []
However, according to UWA’s conservation director, those setbacks have been conquered and it looks like the plan is to move some 20 rhinos to the reserve next year. []
And if this move is successful - meaning if the government can keep poaching in check - the benefits could be substantial.
If the rhinos start reproducing at the reserve, they could potentially be reintroduced in national parks across the country. []
Which would not only help with biodiversity but also would boost Uganda’s wildlife tourism.
But there’s also a symbolic importance to the resurgence in the rhino population - with the founder and CEO of the nonprofit Conservation Through Public Health, saying,
“By bringing back the rhino, it shows that Uganda is stable again and can look after rhinos in their natural setting, which will be amazing.” []
Don’t let your device’s battery run low: go to Ridge get a Ridge Power Bank 10% off!
